It has been 18 years since the 9/11 attacks took place in 2001, and 5 years since the Islamic State called itself caliphate in June 2014. However, international terrorist forces were much more rampant in the five years than the years after 9/11 attacks. International security situation over the past 18 years has not been fundamentally improved. On the contrary, anti-terrorism situation has been getting worse, highlighting the fact that the world has entered a risky society and mankind is facing a compound crisis. 

The military victory over Islamic State in the eastern Syrian village of Baghouz is a "vital milestone in the fight against terrorism", marking the victory of the war on terror in Iraq and Syria. But it should also be noted that the fight in Baghouz can only be seen as a temporary setback for the Islamic State, whether it be its ringleaders or its’ minions, not yet a complete defeat. Some foreign counter-terrorism experts also holds that although the so-called caliphate is gone, the fight is far from over, and the international community has entered the "post-IS era." It is particularly necessary to pay close attention to the following trends and characteristics of terrorism in South Asia, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia. 

First, the anti-terrorism pattern and operational axis in "post-IS era" have changed. As a result of this change, the second-tier countries have become the primary targets of terrorist attacks. 

Second, IS’s terrorist activities have changed from defending city to Jihad’s guerrilla warfare. The battlefield is moving from urban areas, streets and buildings to deserts and rural areas, and the mode of terrorism has also changed from positional warfare and barricade warfare to suicide attacks. 

Third, IS is transforming from "building a government and building a country" to building a Al-Qaeda type organization that is widely dispersed and disaggregated with its fighters returning to their native land, lying low and lying in wait or being lone operator terrorists.   

Fourth, the remaining technologists of IS are still working to improve bomb-making and concealment skills, posing a serious threat to cities and transportation hubs in various countries. 

Fifthly, in accordance with IS's Plan B, the remnants of IS have fled to North Africa, South-East Asia, South Asia and parts of Central Asia, and infiltrated Burkina Faso, Niger and Trinidad and Tobago. 

Sixth, some native terrorist forces has reintegrated with IS, helping and learning from each other. 

Seventh, the safety situation of oceangoing vessels is grim. 

Before the fall of IS, an arrangement similar to Plan B was settled -"implementing a strategy across three geographical rings"; the three major battlefields of the inner ring, the near outer ring and the far outer ring echo each other. The above seven changes in the international terrorist situation are obviously related to IS’s "Plan B". Some cases in recent years highlight the characteristics of "Middle East-Europe complex" and "Middle East-Asia complex". It can be said that the wind of external risk can still pour into the small hole of a country's security flaw. 

In view of this, we must seek ways of defending urban security and be ready for the terrorist attacks at any time. The concept of "security redundancy" in the field of security requires institutional preparation for potential risks, cross blocking and multiple backups. All countries should adhere to the spirit of the rule of law, innovate the way of governance, renew scientific and technological means, increase the exchange of counter-terrorism information through bilateral and multilateral cooperation, enhance the overall ability of law enforcement, and speed up the realization of dignity sharing, development sharing and security sharing, so as to ensure national security, and the people of all countries can have a peaceful living environment.

The United States, in the past three years since Trump elected as president of the United States, has provoked a trade war with China, cracked down on China’s high-tech enterprises, controlled the flow of high and new technologies to China, advanced large-scale arms sales to Taiwan undermining China's sovereignty and national security, and frequently meddles in Hong Kong affairs, and even supports Hong Kong rioters’ violent sabotage activities. Above facts show that the Trump administration has changed its policy from positioning China non-allied friendly country to adopting a mixed policy of engagement and containment (or “congagement”) to seeing China as a major competitor.

Lessons from the America-Japan Trade War of the 1980s and It Must Never be Allowed to Happen Again

In the trade war with the United States, a war which later developed into a currency war, Japan has repeatedly make concessions and policy mistakes, having dealt a huge blow to Japan and greatly weakened its economic strength.

The major lessons are as follows:   

I. Maintaining the basic stability of the exchange rate and financial security.

Economy is the body, finance is the blood. To maintain the basic stability of the exchange rate and financial security is to achieve a healthy and sustainable economic development.

II. Investment in the United States should be strictly guarded against major risks.

In addition to using exchange rate weapons, the other two means the United States used cracking down on other countries are economic sanctions and asset freezes. Both business and government investment in the United States should be strictly guarded against major risks.

III. Self-reliance is the way to a prosperous and strong development and China will never seek hegemony.

Japan is also the first to do a good job and move towards prosperity and strength. The painful lesson of Japan's two ups and downs is that after it has become strong, it has not persisted in doing good and peaceful development with its neighbors. But to invade, plunder and sabotage neighboring countries and launch so-called global attacks.

No matter how strong China's comprehensive national strength is, China will never seek hegemony. It will not only do its own thing well, but also carry out complementary and mutually beneficial cooperation with other countries. We should not only realize the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, but also continue to make greater contributions to safeguarding world peace and common prosperity.

Deepening Reform and Opening up and Breaking the Containment of the United States

China should continue to deepen reform and opening up, properly handle the following four major relations, not only do a good job in our own affairs, but also strengthen complementary and mutually beneficial cooperation with other countries, with both strategic determination and strategic patience, and wage a protracted war with the United States. It is certain that the American siege will eventually be broken.

I. Real economy and virtual economy should complement each other.

II. The introduction of technology and independent innovation should be based on self-reliance.

III. The global market and the domestic market should learn from each other's strengths and complement each other's weaknesses.

The following three areas that are conducive to sustained and rapid economic growth in China have been developing rapidly.

(1) Sustained and rapid growth in the introduction of foreign investment and outward investment.

(2) Trade between China and other countries continues to expand.

(3) Domestic demand has become the main driving force of China's economic growth.

IV. Peaceful Development and National Defense Construction should be coordinated with each other

China-U.S. relations are attracting global attention. At present, the world has entered an era of great power competition. China and the United States have also entered a new phrase of strategic competition. China and the US have several traps to transcend, including the middle income trap facing China, the "Kindleberger Trap" faced by the US and the "Thucydides Trap" that both countries need to cross. The "Kindleberger Trap", also known as the hegemonic stability theory, is put forward by Charles Kindleberger, an economic historian. His thesis, in brief, is that "World stability needs and only needs a hegemony, and if hegemony is unstable, the world will fall into turmoil." The current global instability caused by the United States is just an illustration of this judgment. With the growth of China's power, the transformation of the world and the adjustment of American strategy, the competition between big countries has entered a new stage. Starting with trade frictions, the United States has made an obvious strategic adjustment in China-U.S. relations. Many scholars and politicians are worried about whether China and the United States have fallen into the trap of Thucydides.

In this context, how to understand the past, current situation and future trend of China-U.S. relations has become very important. In my opinion, China-U.S. relations are now hovering on the brink of the "Thucydides trap." Looking back at the history of international relations, whenever the strength of the emerging powers accelerates close to becoming a great power, it is often the most unstable and turbulent relationship between the two countries, which is not only the turbulence of bilateral relations, but also may cause instability in the region and the world as a whole. During the election campaign, Trump actually made a different judgment on China-U.S. relations from previous US policy makers, adjusting relations with China in trade, technology, and other fields since 2018, and strengthening competition with China. As a result, China-U.S. relations have entered the stage of strategic competition. The trade friction between China and the United States is essentially a strategic competition between the two countries in the new industrial revolution, which will last for a long time, and there is a danger of extending to the fields of currency, security and so on. What we see is not only the fierce friction between the two sides in trade, but also the emergence of new thinking and new understanding such as "clash of civilizations". In view of this, well-known US expert on China issues David Lampton pointed out that "China US relations have reached a tipping point, and there is a risk of further deterioration or even full-scale confrontation. 

China's New Strategy towards the United States

A new strategic trend in Sino-US relations is gradually taking shape. The scope and depth of strategic competition between China and the United States are constantly expanding. The United States believes that China's challenge is not only an economic challenge, a security challenge, but also an ideological challenge, an institutional challenge, and even a civilization challenge. There is a risk of strategic confrontation in Sino-US relations. The competition between the two sides will extend to the areas of security and geopolitics. At present, the United States has performed very fully in the fields of trade and technology. It is an inevitable strategic trend for the United States to make use of the Taiwan and South China Sea issues to stir up trouble in the future and to impact China's national security. We need to be fully prepared.

The relationship between China (Soviet Union) and Russia since the establishment of diplomatic relations 70 years ago, figuratively speaking, is inseparable from wind, rain and sunshine. The people's Republic of China was founded and the Soviet Union was the first to establish diplomatic relations. When Mao Zedong visited the Soviet Union, he was stranded for a long time, and for a time it was cloudy and rainy. The clear sky lasted until the early days of Khrushchev's reign. Starting with the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the differences between the two countries and the two parties were gradually exposed, followed by frequent disputes, surging winds and clouds, and even the withdrawal of experts from China by the Soviet Union, setting off a great debate and a mixture of wind and rain. During Brezhnev's time, he invaded Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan and fought against each other twice on the Chinese border. Andropov-Chernenko short transition period, until Gorbachev came to power, relations to normalize, calm. The disintegration of the Soviet Union and Yeltsin led the formation of a Sino-Russian strategic partnership of cooperation. In the 19 years since Putin took office, the comprehensive strategic cooperative partnership between China and Russia has been continuously deepened and flourished. 

Experience and Lessons Should be Cherished

In the course of 70 years of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and Russia, we can get the following enlightenment: 

First, the debate between China and the Soviet Union is actually a collision in the process of human society in the process of exploring socialism. As an important legacy, we should be good at summing up experience and accepting lessons. 

Second, the dislocation of ideological factors will cause serious damage to state-to-state relations. The five principles of peaceful coexistence, which are full of vitality, are the only correct choice for dealing with state-to-state relations, regardless of whether the social system is different or the same. Not to draw lines by ideology, to seek common ground while reserving differences, and to tolerate and learn from each other, in fact, reflect the mutual respect between different civilizations. 

Third, today's Sino-Russian relations are subject to the general law of the adjustment of major power relations and play an exemplary role. This law is composed of three parts: the starting point, the process and the result. Starting point: to safeguard their own interests, while respecting each other's interests, indispensable; process: cooperation and competition coexist, friction and compromise coexist, cooperation should be honest, competition should abide by the rules, friction should not lead to confrontation, compromise should be moderate. The result: mutual benefit, not any gain. 

Fourth, because of their respective great power status, world influence and geopolitical factors, the relationship between China and Russia always affects the world strategic pattern. In the face of "great changes that have not happened in a hundred years" (in Xi Jinping's language), the comprehensive strategic cooperative partnership between China and Russia is not only in the fundamental interests of the two countries and the two peoples, but also a powerful factor in safeguarding and promoting world peace and stability.

Great changes have taken place in China within its 40 years of reform and opening up, from an impoverished and backward country to a well-off society in an all-round way and striding towards prosperity. 

The great achievements of the past 40 years depend mainly on three major elements. 

First of all, I would like to thank the third Plenary session of the 11th CPC Central Committee. As President Xi Jinping said: "under the guidance of Comrade Deng Xiaoping, the third Plenary session of the 11th CPC Central Committee held in December 1978 re-established the ideological line of emancipating the mind and seeking truth from facts, and stopped using the erroneous practice of 'taking class struggle as the outline'. It has been decided to shift the focus of the whole party's work to socialist modernization as a major decision for the realization of reform and opening up, and has realized a great turning point of far-reaching significance in the history of the party. " (speech at the Symposium to commemorate the 110th Anniversary of the birth of Comrade Deng Xiaoping on 20 August 2014). 

Second, more than 1 billion hard-working and brave Chinese people, under the leadership of the Party, have worked hard, worked hard, and worked hard to draw up a beautiful motherland, laying a solid foundation for the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. 

Third, in the 40 years of reform and opening up, the great changes in the international situation have provided China with a rare opportunity: (1) the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States; (2) the disintegration of the Soviet Union; (3) China's accession to the WTO; 4. The G-20 replaced the G-7, and the development of the world economy became a "two-wheel drive" between the United States and China.

Since the frustration of the concept of the European Defense Community in the 1950s, the process of European integration has been advancing in the economic field. With the end of the Cold War, the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the drastic changes in the reunification of the two Germany, the common security and defense policy began to enter the policy field of European integration, but the progress was slow and the actual effect was not satisfactory. Common civil and military cooperation among EU member States is already common, and there is also a certain degree of cooperation in dealing with threats, but there are some problems in the coordination of defence policies, such as necessary resources such as civil, military capabilities, equipment and technology. As it involves national sovereignty, economic and industrial benefits and other issues, to a large extent, it also depends on the political will of member States and the consideration of their own national interests. Since taking office, US President Donald Trump has asked Europe to bear more defense costs and hinted at withdrawing US troops as appropriate. The European Union is beginning to have doubts about whether to continue to rely on the United States for security, and defense cooperation with the United States has weakened. Brexit, Europe's largest military power, will also lead to a weakening of Europe's defence capabilities. Trump's election as president of the United States and the Brexit referendum are major events that have affected the geopolitics of the European Union since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, marking the withdrawal of the United States and Britain from decades of Anglo Saxon's global leadership. In order to strengthen its influence in the international community, Europe must further strengthen its independent efforts in the field of defense and pursue strategic independence. 

"permanent structural cooperation" is at the heart of the reform of the EU's common security and defense policy stipulated by Rio, but progress has been slow for more than a decade. The 2017 meeting of EU foreign ministers identified a joint defense mechanism for "permanent structural cooperation", which promoted the building of common security and defense in the EU. 

After the launch of the "permanent structural cooperation" mechanism, its actual contribution to European defence will depend on the level of compliance of the participating countries with their obligations. It includes not only the will to fulfill the obligations, but also the ability to fulfill the obligations. If the level of implementation is high, it will contribute to the smooth implementation of this mechanism and promote the achievement of European strategic autonomy. If the defence plans of member States can operate in coordination under the cooperative mechanism of the annual coordinated defence review, it is expected that the military capability objectives will be successfully completed. If such coordination is a mere formality, member States will continue to focus only on their own defence. If the EU can increase its participation in these programmes, it will be closer and closer to achieving the goal of a true common security and defence policy. If the participation of member States is not high, the EU, despite greater strategic autonomy, is a far cry from common security and defence objectives. The revitalization of EU defence and its industrial and technological base requires additional efforts by member States. If funding from the Union is insufficient or if national budgets are not supported by the Common Defense Fund it is difficult to allocate the costs and benefits of the European defence industry and technological base in a balanced manner. Judging from the projects currently implemented by the joint defense mechanism of "permanent structural cooperation", the main focus is on the research, development and procurement of arms cooperation, especially the standardization and stylization of arms work. In order to increase the competitiveness of the EU military industry and the coordination of the actions of participating countries. Therefore, it can be seen that "permanent structural cooperation" is not a complete organization, but only a framework for cooperation. There is still a long way to go from cooperation to sharing to form a common security and defense in the implementation of specific projects.

Since he was elected president of France in 2017, Macron has carried out economic and social reforms in an all-round way, promoted the integration of the European Union, and actively safeguarded international multilateralism. In the twinkling of an eye, Macron was about to finish the first half of his presidential term. In two and a half years, he had experienced the initial downwind and water, suddenly fell into a trough by the crisis, and then set out again, and his ruling idea was becoming more and more mature. Looking ahead to the second half of Macron's presidency, there are still both opportunities and challenges. 

I. the idea of being in power. 

(1) progressivism. (2) Social liberalism. (3) Europeanism. (4) multilateralism. 

II. Promoting domestic Reform. 

(1) Reform of the political system. (2) Economic and social structural reform. (3) to ensure social security. 

III. Strengthening the Construction of Europe. 

(1) promoting European integration. (2) to enhance the strategic autonomy of the European Union. (3) to promote "protective Europe". 

IV. Giving full play to International influence. 

(1) balancing relations among major powers. (2) to put forward constructive suggestions on regional hot issues. (3) to promote the "Indo-Pacific Strategy". (4) hold high the banner of climate control. 

V. prospects. 

(1) the domestic reform environment has improved, but it is still fragile. 

(2) the construction of the European Union ushered in an opportunity, but it was difficult to achieve it overnight. 

(3) continue to be active on the international stage, but with more influence and less influence.

There are many researches on pension reform. In the past 30 years, pension plans around the world are always in the process of continuous reform and change. The main feature of these changes is the transformation of the public old-age insurance scheme from a pay-as-you-go system to a hybrid pension scheme characterized by full or partial privatization. 

In general, the mainstream view of the change in public pension plans is that the decline in the birth rate and the extension of expected life have led to an increase in the dependency ratio of the system. With fewer and fewer contributors and more and more pensioners, pension funds are naturally on the verge of being unsustainable. 

At the same time, the time has come for pension reform and adjustment. Generally speaking, the initial plan that the government comes up with is to increase contributions or reduce treatment. Whether it is providing contributions or reducing treatment, the government finds that it can lead to social and political instability, and the search for a "third path" has become the biggest problem for pension reformers. The research on the reasons of pension reform focuses on population factors, mechanism and system factors, technical factors and so on. This study is to eliminate these external factors and analyze the benefit-cost analysis of pension system reform in developed countries from the perspective of moral hazard model of information economics. 

The Enlightenment of Pension system Reform in developed countries to China's Pension Reform

The situation in China is relatively special, and China's population structure also has its particularity compared with other developing countries. China has rapidly reduced the support rate within the system through external forces, and in addition, we are facing many economic and social challenges. First, the task of development, although China's economy has developed by leaps and bounds for 30 years, but China is still in the catch-up stage, China ranks among the world's needs in terms of per capita GDP, and second, we are still facing the stage of consolidating achievements. 

All these put forward a lot of constraints on the reform of the pension system. Our choice of incentive factors is relatively limited, and the choice of incentives is more cautious. There is little room for the reform of the basic pension system, and it is faced with the force of optimizing the old system itself. Therefore, for China's pension system, it is chosen to optimize the pension system of other pillars. It may be a good choice to react to the basic pension system through an external system. 

Of course, this does not mean that China's basic pension system can do nothing. It is still desirable to reduce part of the moral hazard through the construction of transparent basic financial facilities, and it is also conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of the system. On the other hand, the reform of the financial hard restraint mechanism of the system can also be partially reformed. China's pension system long-term financial soft restraint mechanism brings the system unsustainable, which brings a lot of pressure to the pension fund. 

Finally, a reasonable distinction between individual accounts and pay-as-you-go system parameters design is also the current choice of concentration can be done. The basic pension in China lacks fixed pension payment, and there are incentive factors in the pay-as-you-go system, especially in the individual account system. 

In the future, we can consider adjusting the corresponding parameters, reducing incentive factors, or merging to make the pay-as-you-go part into the appropriate pay-as-you-go part. In a word, the particularity of our environment determines that we can not take the path of pension reform in developed countries. Under our own constraints, we should combine security effect and incentive effect to promote the healthy development of the system. It also makes the whole macro-economy develop healthily and steadily.

In observing Taiwan's politics and society, as well as in studying cross-strait relations, Taiwan's public opinion is one of the most frequent words. There are a large number of research or analysis articles on Taiwan's public opinion, and even special seminars on social conditions and public opinion in Taiwan. However, we seldom carry on the theoretical thinking and in-depth analysis on the public opinion itself and related issues, and basically take a large number of opinion polls in Taiwan as the basis to judge the trend and change of public opinion on the island. This paper briefly discusses and analyzes the public opinion and related concepts as well as the relationship between public opinion and related concepts in Taiwan. 

I. Public opinion and the will of the people. 

Public opinion can be used as an index of analysis and observation through a large number of opinion polls, but it is difficult to grasp and measure the hearts and minds of the people. Popular sentiment refers to the social mentality, social cognition and values of the people in a country or region for a certain period of time, which is related to public opinion, but different from public opinion. Many of the election results in Taiwan are very different or inconsistent with the public opinion polls in advance, that is, the public opinion obtained in the opinion polls does not necessarily reflect the true aspirations of the people. Dr. Zhang Mingrui of Taiwan points out that the politics of public opinion concerned by western political theory must also pay attention to the broader issue of the orientation of the political people in the oriental political culture. 

II. Public opinion and opinion polls. 

Public opinion refers to the attitude and position of the people of a country or region towards a certain event or thing, especially the public policy under certain conditions. Opinion polls are conducted through a technical means to investigate the attitude and position of the people. Because public opinion can be shaped and manipulated, opinion polls conducted by organizations with different political backgrounds in Taiwan have different or even opposite results on the same issue. If the way of the poll is different, or the pollster is different, the results will be different. The results of urban and rural polls will also be different. Polls held at different times will also affect the results of the polls. However, a comprehensive analysis and comparison of the results of various opinion polls will basically reflect more consistent trends and results. 

III. Public opinion and Democracy. 

Public opinion is a form of democracy, and democracy is also an expression of public opinion, which often determines the outcome of events by "majority public opinion" or "majority decision". In the context of democratic politics, democratic politics is a kind of "public opinion politics". Democratic politics can also be called "representative politics". After the election of the majority, the representative system is constructed to form the government governance system of "elite politics". In fact, democracy is first and foremost an idea and value, which is different from democratic politics or democratic system. 

IV. Public opinion and populism. 

Populism is a way of political mobilization, is a performance and means to stimulate public opinion. The prevalence of populism in Taiwan today is the result of politicians taking advantage of and manipulating public opinion under Taiwan's democratic politics. Dr. Zhang Mingrui believes that according to Professor Huang Guangguo's research, under the administration of Lee Teng-hui, Taiwan has entered the form of populist democratic politics. Today's Tsai ing-wen government, in order to continue to fulfill its ideological goals, Through the demands of public opinion, the populist social movement of "making officials by the people" was formed in the opposition. The social operation of "controlling the people by the people" in the DPRK is a kind of populist politics in the form of deepening. Taiwan populism is intertwined with ethnic issues, reunification and independence issues, and "anti-Chinese middle consciousness." 

V. Public opinion and referendum. 

Referendum is a direct legal means to appeal to public opinion, is the legal form of public opinion. In the event of major policy bills or issues encountered major disputes and unable to reach a compromise, in accordance with the legal process, the referendum Act may be adopted to make the final decision in the form of law. Referendum has become an important means of dispute resolution which is widely used in the world today. However, in the process of the implementation of the referendum results, the interpretation and use of the relevant provisions of the referendum Law by all walks of life, especially the authorities, will also give rise to disputes and disputes, which will not completely solve the problem. 

VI. Public Opinion and Party Will

The development of a party must not only have the recognition and support of party members, but also have the support of the public or voters, that is, the support of public opinion, in order to enter the parliament and realize governance and development. Party intention is the program, proposition and discipline of a political party, hoping to be supported and joined by those who recognize it. There is a close relationship between public opinion and the party's will. If the party's intention goes against public opinion, it may lose the support of the voters, but the party members will not change their support for the party under the party's cognition and discipline. There is also a relationship between personal value and interests. 

VII. Public Opinion and Law

Public opinion is not a legal norm, is not a legal basis, those in power can not completely rely on public opinion as the basis for decision-making, nor can they decide the fate of those in power. Public opinion cannot replace the law, nor can it necessarily change the law. The law is an institutional arrangement that embodies the will of the rulers, but it is still necessary to reflect public opinion under democratic politics and must meet the expectations of the people. Some changes to the law are the result of strong public opinion pressure or some amendments have led to a strong public opinion backlash, and even led to political unrest. Constitutional amendments in many developing countries have led to major popular uprisings. However, the system and amendment of the law need to be carried out in accordance with certain legal procedures, and can not be decided entirely according to public opinion. 

VIII. The relationship between the majority public opinion and the minority public opinion

There are mainstream public opinion, majority public opinion (absolute majority and relative majority) and minority public opinion. Generally speaking, under the principle of democratic politics, the minority is subordinate to the majority, but in today's Taiwan political culture, we also attach great importance to respecting the views of the minority and the public opinion of the minority, and respect for the individual is becoming increasingly important and universal. Once the issue is politicized, this conclusion may not necessarily apply, and even the phenomenon that the minority public opinion in Taiwan overrides the majority public opinion has been fully proved by the populist politics operated by the minority public opinion. 

IX. Public Opinion in Taiwan and Public Opinion on both sides of the strait

On Taiwan-related issues, we have always talked about public opinion in Taiwan, but we seldom mention and discuss public opinion on both sides of the strait and the aspirations of the people on both sides of the strait. If it is matters such as public issues within Taiwan, of course, there is no problem in discussing public opinion and the will of the people in Taiwan. If it involves issues such as cross-strait sovereignty and national reunification, we cannot simply talk about public opinion in Taiwan or the mainstream public opinion in Taiwan. Instead, we should talk about public opinion on both sides of the strait. Taiwan is a part of China, and the future of Taiwan and the issue of reunification and independence are of course decided jointly by the people on both sides of the strait, that is, by all the Chinese people. The people of Taiwan alone cannot decide the future of Taiwan alone, nor can they deprive the people of the mainland of their state sovereignty rights.